Browsing by Author "Parkinson, Charles R."

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Effects of a sodium fluoride- and phytate-containing dentifrice on remineralisation of enamel erosive lesions—an in situ randomised clinical study
    (Springer, 2018-02-08) Creeth, Jonathan E.; Parkinson, Charles R.; Burnett, Gary R.; Sanyal, Susmita; Lippert, Frank; Zero, Domenick T.; Hara, Anderson T.; Cariology, Operative Dentistry and Dental Public Health, School of Dentistry
    ObjectiveThe objective of this work was to evaluate effects of a dentifrice containing sodium fluoride (1150 ppm F) and the organic polyphosphate phytate (0.85% w/w of the hexa-sodium salt) on in situ remineralisation of early enamel erosive lesions and resistance to subsequent demineralisation.Materials and methodsSubjects (n = 62) wore palatal appliances holding eight bovine enamel specimens with pre-formed erosive lesions. They brushed their natural teeth with the phytate test dentifrice (TD); a positive control dentifrice (PC, 1150 ppm fluoride as NaF); a reference dentifrice (RD, disodium pyrophosphate + 1100 ppm fluoride as NaF) or a negative control dentifrice (NC, fluoride-free) in a randomised, double-blind, crossover design. Specimens were removed at 2, 4 and 8 h post-brushing and exposed to an ex vivo acid challenge. Surface microhardness (Knoop) was measured at each stage. The primary efficacy variable was relative erosion resistance (RER); other variables included the surface microhardness recovery (SMHR), acid resistance ratio (ARR) and enamel fluoride uptake (EFU).ResultsAfter 4 h, the results for RER, ARR and EFU were in the order PC > TD = RD > NC with PC > TD = RD = NC for SMHR. Results at 2 and 8 h were generally consistent with the 4 h data. Mineralisation progressed over time. Dentifrices were generally well-tolerated.ConclusionsIn this in situ model, addition of phytate or pyrophosphate to a fluoride dentifrice inhibited the remineralising effect of fluoride. Both formulations still delivered fluoride to the enamel and inhibited demineralisation, albeit to a lesser extent than a polyphosphate-free dentifrice.Clinical relevanceAddition of phytate or pyrophosphate to a fluoride dentifrice may reduce its net anti-erosive properties.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    A randomised clinical evaluation of a fluoride mouthrinse and dentifrice in an in situ caries model
    (Elsevier, 2018) Parkinson, Charles R.; Hara, Anderson T.; Nehme, Marc; Lippert, Frank; Zero, Domenick T.; Cariology, Operative Dentistry and Dental Public Health, School of Dentistry
    Objectives Fluoride mouthrinses provide advantages for fluoride delivery by maintaining elevated intra-oral fluoride concentrations following fluoride dentifrice use. This in situ caries study investigated potential anti-caries efficacy of a 220 ppm fluoride mouthrinse. Methods This was an analyst-blinded, four-treatment, randomised, crossover study using partially demineralised, gauze-wrapped, human enamel samples mounted in a mandibular partial denture. Participants brushed twice daily for 14 days with either a 1150 ppm fluoride or a fluoride-free placebo dentifrice and either rinsed once daily with the 220 ppm fluoride mouthrinse or not. Following each treatment period, percent surface microhardness recovery (%SMHR) and enamel fluoride uptake (EFU) were assessed. Results Fifty three participants completed the study. Compared with the placebo dentifrice/no rinse treatment, the fluoride-containing regimens demonstrated greater enamel remineralisation (%SMHR) and fluoridation (EFU): fluoride dentifrice/fluoride rinse (%SMHR difference: 21.55 [95% CI: 15.78,27.32]; EFU difference 8.35 [7.21,9.29]); fluoride dentifrice/no rinse: 19.48 [13.81,25.15]; 6.47 [5.35,7.60]; placebo dentifrice/fluoride rinse: 16.76 [11.06,22.45]; 5.87 [4.72,7.00] (all P < .0001). There were no significant differences in%SMHR between fluoride regimens. The fluoride dentifrice/fluoride rinse regimen was associated with higher EFU than the fluoride dentifrice/no rinse (1.88 [0.75,3.01], P = .0013) and placebo dentifrice/fluoride rinse regimens (2.48 [1.34,3.62], P < .0001). Treatments were generally well-tolerated. Conclusions The in situ caries model demonstrated that the fluoride mouthrinse is effective in promoting enamel caries lesion remineralisation and fluoridation whether used following a fluoride or non-fluoride dentifrice. Additive (potential) anti-caries benefits of a fluoride rinse after a fluoride dentifrice were confined to enhancements in lesion fluoridation (EFU). Clinical significance In conjunction with a fluoride dentifrice, fluoride mouthrinses enhance enamel fluoridation, which may be useful in caries prevention.